Bernie Sanders: Time For A Federal Living Wage

originally posted by: Zngland
a reply to: Boadicea

The proportionate wage is a great idea i prefer this, an exception being that the creator of the business should be able to decide how much he/she is compensated.

I'm not sure what you mean by this. I agree that the creator of the business has the responsibility and privilege of setting wages, even his/her own, but that is dependent on the success of the company as well (i.e., even the creator can't take a higher pay than the profits of the company can support). I like the proportionate wage because it allows everyone to profit proportionately, including the creator, without limiting their potential pay to an arbitrary amount, even when the company is very profitable. Capping pay also caps performance, innovation and success.

Since without them there would be no generation of income for anybody.

I understand what you are saying, and I agree to a certain extent. But the employer would not have hired employees if he/she could do everything him/herself, so obviously the company could not generate that higher level of income for the creator if not for the labor of the employee. It goes both ways.

And I also have to point out that crony capitalism has made it increasing difficult -- if not impossible -- for you and me to even start our own business, thus eliminating (or at least grossly limiting) any competition. If we returned to free market principles, many employees could -- and would rather -- work for themselves. There is nothing good or right about using color of law (and/or regulations) to limit my opportunities and choices, then tell me how lucky I am to work for scraps for someone else.

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: beezzer
Raising the minumum wage will get more people off of government subsidies.

If Seattle is any indication, I believe that assertion can be considered disproven.

I'm in favor of it.

Mind you, it won't work. The end result will be some combination of job losses and inflation. You can magically raise wages, but the problem is, you can't magically raise the amount of goods and services in the economy to meet that added demand. But on the bright side, it might finally convince people that the pipe dream that there's a free lunch waiting for them out there somewhere is just that, a pipe dream.

originally posted by: Willtell

The booming economic era of the 50’s, 60’s, and 70’s was based on a highly unionized work force where wages were rising over the years and a heavy manufacturing base of secure jobs pervaded the landscape.

The post-war economic boom was due more to the fact that we were the only major country not to have its entire manufacturing infrastructure destroyed or disrupted.

originally posted by: AlaskanDad
Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders Has a few choice words about the minimum wage in the US of A:

“It is a national disgrace that millions of full-time workers are living in poverty and millions more are forced to work two or three jobs just to pay their bills,” Sanders said during a rally near the U.S. Capitol.

“A job must lift workers out of poverty, not keep them in it,” Sanders said. “The current federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour is a starvation wage and must be raised to a living wage.”

source

Those morally corrupt politicians who serve the corporations have a challenger!

Go Bernie!!!

A job must produce more than it costs. I predict a lot of minimum wage jobs disappearing from the economy. That means more people on government payouts, which of course means more government supporters. The basic political equation for socialists.

I will support a federal living wage when everyone that makes less than 1 million dollars a year is entitled to the same amount of benefits. Until then I stand against it 100%. Why should those who work hard for what they have be punished because some do not?

If you want everyone to get a participation ribbon, then so be it, all or none! See how that works out for you.

a reply to: SpaDe_

That is why government never waits for unanimous support.

Easier to appease those who have nothing left to loose and are ready to act than convince everyone else.

a reply to: SubTruth

your post has to many buzz words and talking points to be taken seriously. lol's

Real ah-muricans don't talk like that!

I think that on topics such as these, it would be prudent to explore new and innovative ideas rather than just going for the most obvious "solution."

Kind of like MM's idea of small dwellings rather than a monthly allotment. Of course, I am highly partial to the idea as it has been the focus of a lot of my effort and research for several years.. Or how about free classes and materials for growing their own food?

I think that such assistance should have the goal of encouraging self sufficiency rather than dependence. This would not only help reduce overall costs, but also effectively sort those who simply want everything for free from those trying to get through difficult times.

It could completely change the face of a subject like a "livable wage" and poverty in general.

a reply to: interupt42


Don't waste your time explaining facts about this. I have tryed until I was blue in the face.

Facts make no difference, just feelings.

originally posted by: ketsuko
Oh eff it! Let's just all in and create a fully centrally controlled command economy already.

I don't need to own anything. You don't need to own anything. We can ALL live on the all-powerful beneficence of the state!

All hail the NWO and our wonderful bureaucratic overlords!

Shrug. Just make the mandated federal minimum wage $100/hour and we can all drive Porsches into our jobs bagging groceries.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Willtell

The booming economic era of the 50’s, 60’s, and 70’s was based on a highly unionized work force where wages were rising over the years and a heavy manufacturing base of secure jobs pervaded the landscape.

The post-war economic boom was due more to the fact that we were the only major country not to have its entire manufacturing infrastructure destroyed or disrupted.

This! Oh, this indeed.

The US was the only industrialized nation not bombed to bits and that lead to the US being the economic powerhouse it was for decades after the war.

a reply to: dismanrc

Yep, that appears to be the trend around here as of late. People think emotionally and throw logic out the door.